Thankfully, the rule of law is much more important than your hissy fit.



We moved away from your kind of thinking in the middle ages.

My Irony-O-Meter just exploded.

It really is a mess all this, isn't it? Do you know what I'd have to put it down too? See the two rape complainants, 'casualties of war' like many on here have surmised in the past. Just like them photographers killed by that US helicopter gunship in Iraq. It's a tough world we live in!

What war?



And I didn't have you down as a 'two wrongs make a right' kind of guy.

Sorry, are you really saying that going in to a police station is not materially different from being forcibly extradited? Really?

No, it would be up to the Swedes to do that, come back with their evidence and say we want you to extradite because ........ and here is the evidence we are basing that request on. We then look at it, say, yeah that looks like you have a pretty good case, lets extradite or no, Sweden you are talking nonsense, you have no evidence we arent going to extradite.





I dont think the fact it is an emotive accusation means we should be free to forcibly extradite someone based purely on an accusation.



And as i have said, i dont disagree that the swedish authorities should investigate and if necessary rule on, i also think we (the uk) should ask for a higher standard of evidence (or even some) before we forcibly extradite someone.



as for your last question, If he had stayed in Sweden, we wouldn’t be extraditing him and as such would have no duty to make sure we were doing it in a fair way. I don’t think it would be wrong for the British government to be held responsible for consequences of extradition for the people they extradite and not for the people they don’t.

Come off it Kosh...Have you seen the state of that 'Jule's' geezer? If we didn't know better we'd have thought he batted for t'other side....the most he's done is fingered them two birds, tops. He aint got a good sh@g in 'im! We know the ones who really got fooked in all this, don't we??? See 'Iraqi civilians killed in Iraq' as a starting point!

No, im saying he was free to leave Sweden, was told he could leave Sweden and as a free man, when he left Sweden, he was under no obligation to ever wilfully return to Sweden. Which is what I said, not the weird straw man you just invented

Someone saying you did something, presenting no evidence to corroborate it, and them being in a different country isn’t a good reason to force someone to leave their job, home, and life to travel to another country and face their justice system and their procedures. If it were we would have the same extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia and we would be deporting rape victims for a flogging.

No it isnt, there is a difference between forcible extradtion and extradition. One involves force, one doesnt. We are, and have been threatening a forcible extradition.

You realise he hasn't denied what happened, right? He's only arguing consent?



Once again, I didn't have you down as a 'two wrongs' guy. And you haven't told me what 'war' you consider the two alleged rape victims to be part of.

The imaginary 'War on Terror'. Jump out of that box now and again mate.

Ah. Your tin foil hat has come into play I see.

WTF?



The analogy is if he was still in Sweden he would rightly have got his collar felt and been escorted ("forcibly"icon_wink.gif to the station for questioning. In this respect, the only material difference is how far it is to the police station, and its him who has put the extra miles between himself and it.



The difference is what he is wanted at that police station for. If it was for parking on a yellow line, he would not be extradited, but as the allegation is rape, he would.



Unless you have concealed some other point in your cryptic question, I trust that answers it?





The whole point of an EU-wide system was based on the fact that the starting point is that EU countries can - or ought to be able to - trust each other's investigative systems to presume that the investigation is done fairly. That is the whole point of the EAW procedures. You are in effect saying that we shouldn't have passed the law, because Sweden can't be trusted, but we did. Write to your MP. I am discussing the situation as it is, although the basic premise seems very sound to me.





Stop saying "forcibly"! When was there ever a voluntary extradition?!





Er, well, no. I must give you that one. It hadn't occurred to me that Sweden would not ask us to extradite someone who wasn't here, but there, but I agree it is unlikely they would.





The trouble with pesky things like EU-wide laws is that they have to spell out a precise legal framework for all people in all EU countries. So we reasonably do not use "in a fair way", which could mean anything or nothing, and instead we use "in accordance with the specific legal requirements agreed by all member states and set out in specific legal documents X, Y and Z". So that any person can know precisely where they stand.



That way, the question is not "is it fair"? but "is it or is it not compliant with the law".



And if it is compliant with the law, but you still think it is unfair, then you can even take that one up with the ECHR - provided the unfairness alleged is within the relevant scope.









What exactly ARE the consequences of extradition for people the British government doesn't extradite? My head hurts.

'I can see clearly now the rain has gone.....' Off for some dinnertime Stella. Keep up the good work.